Eyecandy Showgirls must shut down because it violates zoning code, other rules, city officials say

Pedestrians walk past the Eyecandy Showgirls strip club on Bay Boulevard in Chula Vista last week. The city has served club owners with notices of violations of various municipal codes. The business owners have until May 21 to respond. Hayne Palmour IV • U-T

Pedestrians walk past the Eyecandy Showgirls strip club on Bay Boulevard in Chula Vista last week. The city has served club owners with notices of violations of various municipal codes. The business owners have until May 21 to respond. Hayne Palmour IV • U-T

Chula Vista officials say the strip club violates a city ordinance that requires adult businesses to be at least 500 feet from property that has a residential use, or that is zoned for residential purposes. Hayne Palmour IV • U-T

Chula Vista officials say the strip club violates a city ordinance that requires adult businesses to be at least 500 feet from property that has a residential use, or that is zoned for residential purposes. Hayne Palmour IV • U-T

CHULA VISTA 
City officials have told the owners of Eyecandy Showgirls, a strip club that opened last year in Chula Vista, that the business violates numerous municipal codes and must shut down by June 7.

The most notable is a violation of the zoning code, in which the city says the nude club is operating where it doesn’t belong. It also was cited for fire, sign and building code violations. The violation notices were served May 7.

Eyecandy opened for business in October under the guise of a comedy club, catching city officials and residents off guard.

Deborah Fox, a Los Angeles attorney retained by the city last fall to propose updates to an ordinance relating to sexually oriented businesses, said a business such as Eyecandy cannot operate within 500 feet of property that is used or zoned for residential purposes, a school, a park or a church, among other things. Specifically, Fox said Eyecandy is within 500 feet of residentially zoned property located across Interstate 5.

The City Council adopted the new adult-oriented business regulations at the end of October, and the Chula Vista Police Department investigated to determine if they were being upheld.

Eyecandy has the option to either operate as nonadult use or relocate.

“If the business can’t operate legally where it is now, where could it operate?” Eyecandy attorney Roger Diamond asked. He said that if the city could identify a location where the business could operate legally, it would move.

City Attorney Glen Googins said there are several available locations throughout the city, but Fox said the business has shown little interest in working with the city.

“We would certainly entertain if Eyecandy wanted to have some settlement discussion on where they might move to, but they showed they had no desire to work with the city about finding a legally permissible site when they went in under false pretenses into an illegally zoned site,” Fox said.

The amended regulations for sexually oriented businesses in Chula Vista limit hours of operation, prohibit direct touching between patrons and performers and implement a six-foot separation rule, which went into effect immediately.

“To my knowledge Eyecandy is not complying with those operating standards,” Fox said.

The law changes also sought to reduce potential adverse effects of sexually oriented businesses, including community blight, public indecency, prostitution and property crime.

“The U.S. Supreme Court has said that adult facilities carry with them and bring into a community, negative secondary effects,” Fox said. “That is why we have the operating standards that we implemented … to preclude some of the secondary effects that occur.”

Chula Vista Police Capt. Gary Wedge said secondary impacts that could be attributed to Eyecandy will require greater analysis.

Diamond said that if the city cannot prove Eyecandy is “causing a nuisance” then he didn’t see the point of the rules.

“Are the rules being broken and is the breaking of the rule causing something bad to happen?” Diamond said. “There would be no need for the rule if something bad hasn’t happened.”